From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: fd2f04f1df78e92330aea924ef55cf284bfdd549007748a4d86aa131f2784263
Message ID: <199701201518.JAA02060@einstein>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-20 15:11:18 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:11:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:11:18 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd)
Message-ID: <199701201518.JAA02060@einstein>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text
Forwarded message:
> > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a
> > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the
> > set of Reals.
>
> They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely
> the set of reals.
Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the
ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals
which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak
(even though we are).
Another pretty nifty trick.
Jim Choate
CyberTects
ravage@ssz.com
Return to January 1997
Return to “Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>”
1997-01-20 (Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:11:18 -0800 (PST)) - Re: Dedikend Cut’s and such (fwd) - Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>